DOCSLIB.ORG

The Whole Shebang

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
The Whole Shebang Cultures of Creativity: Politics, Leadership and Organizational Change in the U.S. Labor Movement By Teresa Christine Sharpe A Dissertation Submitted in Partial Satisfaction of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology in the Graduate Division of the University of California, Berkeley Committee in Charge: Professor Kim Voss, Chair Professor Margaret Weir Professor Christopher Ansell Professor George Strauss Fall 2010 Abstract Cultures of Creativity: Politics, Leadership and Organizational Change in the U.S. Labor Movement By Teresa Christine Sharpe Doctor of Philosophy in Sociology University of California, Berkeley Professor Kim Voss, Chair This dissertation uses case studies of four service-industry labor unions to explore the causes of union revitalization in the United States labor movement. While the Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union (HERE) were able to undergo processes of internal transformation by the late 1990s, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME) and the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW) were not. This project illustrates how successfully revitalized unions were able to foster "cultures of creativity," which inspired new organizing strategies and new understandings about what a union should be. Two factors were particularly important to the generation of these cultures. First, cohorts of social movement outsiders brought new ideas to these unions. Second, revitalized unions had organizational structures that were decentralized enough for experimentation, but centralized enough for coordination, meaning that outsiders had the space to experiment and unions had the infrastructure to learn from, and scale up, those experiments that were successful. 1 Chapter One: Explaining Change in the American Labor Movement In the mid-1990s, labor unions in the United States looked as if they might come back to life. Janitors in Los Angeles, Denver and Washington DC made national news as they clamored into downtown luxury office buildings, blocked traffic on major thoroughfares and won union contracts that brought their wages up to the highest in the nation. Around the same time, casino workers at a major hotel on the Las Vegas strip walked off the job in protest of wage reductions and cuts in health and pension benefits, beginning a six-year strike that was the longest in U.S. history. Not long afterwards, 74,000 homecare workers in Los Angeles County were brought under a union contract in what was labor’s single largest success since the massive organizing campaigns in industrial workplaces in the 1930’s. Most union successes in the past decade have been among those workers most people would not have associated with unions. Instead of victories among autoworkers or steelworkers, the most noteworthy campaigns have been undertaken by service-sector unions with large numbers of immigrants, people of color and women – all workers unions at one time labeled “unorganizable.” As Jo-Ann Mort aptly put it in the title to her 1998 book, what we were seeing was “Not Your Father’s Labor Movement.” These developments have caught the attention of activists and academics, many of whom have spoken of a “new” or “revitalized” labor movement (For example, Milkman 2006; Fantasia and Voss 2004; Nissen 2003; Fletcher and Hurd 2001; Voss and Sherman 2000). This attention to revitalization is partly right: more unions have abandoned a model that focused on resolving individual worker grievances and maintaining member services for a model that emphasizes strategic and tactical creativity, worker mobilization, community coalitions and the organization of workers long considered outside the exclusionary bounds of the post-war labor movement. How unions organize has also changed, as more unions experiment with a broad range of confrontational tactics reminiscent of social movements of the 1960s and 1970s. On the political front, unions have mobilized larger numbers of members and supporters in electoral campaigns, in some regions defeating well-financed anti-union candidates and ballot measures. Compared with even a decade ago, the labor movement has dramatically expanded its scope of interest and mobilizing capacities. Yet this focus on the “new” glosses over that which remains the same. It has been over a decade since janitors captured the imagination of people hoping for a sea change in a movement that had long ago lost its vitality. From today’s vantage point it is safe to say that isolated victories failed to produce a domino effect among U.S. unions. Some unions have undergone major internal reorganization and have adopted new practices, but most continue to do what they have done for decades. This does not make headlines: most of the growth and strategic innovation is happening in only a small handful of unions. In 2000, ten of the AFL-CIO’s 66 affiliate unions brought in eighty percent of labor’s new members, while three of them brought in a full fifty percent, debunking the 1 illusion of widespread union revitalization (Hurd, Milkman, and Turner 2003).1 Bronfenbrenner and Hickey, in their research on union elections supervised by the National Labor Relations Board, show that despite the fact that unions are more successful when they use innovative and diverse tactics—and this is true even in mobile, global industries—most unions continue to rely on outdated and largely unsuccessful practices (Bronfenbrenner and Hickey 2004)2. Earlier research has thus shown that American unions are either consistently failing to use strategies that might lead to growth, or else are failing despite this. Given both the emergent creativity and enduring stagnation in American unions, we can say that a “new,” more dynamic model of unionism is at best uneven and underdeveloped. My dissertation explores this heterogeneity in the contemporary American labor movement. Why have changes occurred in some unions but not in others? What leads certain unions aggressively to pursue internal organizational change and innovative practices while others remain committed to an older model of unionism? And among the unions that have changed, how have they managed to do this? Specifically, how are agendas for change developed and legitimized within organizations with longstanding, bureaucratic structures? Finally, among “transformed” unions, what does change look like on the ground, and what are the tensions embedded within different models for change? In order to answer these questions, I compare four national unions: The Service Employees International Union (SEIU), the Hotel and Restaurant Employees (HERE)3, the American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees (AFSCME), and the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW). For obvious reasons, I privilege SEIU and HERE, given their successful transformations. AFSCME and UFCW, however, provide important foils for my two cases of transformation. These cases will make sense to scholars familiar with American Unions. My two positive cases, The Service Employees International Union (SEIU) and The Hotel and Restaurant Workers Union (HERE), were responsible for all the examples I gave of innovative campaigns at the beginning of this chapter. More than any other union today, SEIU is the poster child of the new labor movement. Although their massive reorganization is not without its problems and critics, there is no denying that this organization has embarked on an internal change project unparalleled among 1 The three were the SEIU, UFCW and the International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers (IBEW). For reasons I go into at greater length later on, however, membership statistics alone are not a sufficient measure for union revitalization. 2 Bronfennbrenner (1998) and then Bronfenbrenner and Hickey (2004) study union elections supervised by the National Labor Relations Board. They find that unions win more elections when they run what are referred to in labor circles as “comprehensive campaigns,” which are campaigns that use a wide range of tactics to put pressure on multiple areas where employers are vulnerable. They also find that unions win more elections when they actively involve rank-and- file workers. 3 For the most part, my research is on the Hotel Employees and Restaurant Employees Union prior to its 2004 merger with the Union of Needletrades, Industrial and Textile Employees (UNITE). The newly merged union goes by the acronym “UNITEHERE!” Given my focus on the union pre-merger, however, as well as the current controversies between the two branches of UNITEHERE! that threaten the merger’s survival, I have chosen to call the union HERE throughout the dissertation. 2 contemporary unions. HERE is much smaller and less visible than SEIU but they have also made major strides in remaking their organization and becoming more effective vis- à-vis employers. While there is diversity within each of these national unions by local, region and industry, SEIU and HERE have undergone the most significant internal changes in the labor movement today. These internal changes have enabled them to practice a form of unionism unique in the labor movement. More than anything else, these unions are committed to strategic organizing. This means that leaders at the highest level of the organization create effective, relevant and innovative strategies for a variety of contexts. Rejecting a one-size-fits-all approach, leaders recognize that strategy must be tailored to fit specific regions and occupational
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Understanding the Split in the US Labour Movement
    Business union vs. business union? Understanding the split in the US labour movement Ian Greer In summer 2005, the trade union movement formalised its split into two rival confederations. The split was precipitated by the 2001 disaffiliation of the carpenters’ union, the Republican electoral victory of 2004, and the decline in union membership. Seven unions, accounting for forty per cent of the membership of the AFL-CIO formed Change to Win as a response to that federation’s ineffectiveness. This article concludes that the split may lead to new techniques for campaigning, but that it will not affect the fortunes or the social vision of the trade union movement. The November 2004 re-election of George W. Bush brought the morale of the progressive camp in the US to a new low. Not only was Bush to remain president, but his level of support within the electorate had actually increased. Staff at several so-called ‘organising unions’ had issued proposals to reform the labour movement the previous year; and with the defeat of John Kerry, reform-minded union leaders now demanded the resignation of top leaders of the AFL-CIO [American Federation of Labor and Congress of Industrial Organizations]. When they failed to win majority support for their plan at the June 2005 convention, seven national unions, representing six million workers or forty per cent of AFL- CIO affiliated union members, formed a new group, ‘Change to Win’, which held its founding convention in September 2005. What does this split mean for the future of us unions? In this paper, I will argue that the new federation may create a more efficient organising apparatus, but that it will not push the unions’ political programmes beyond business unionism.
    [Show full text]
  • SEIU Historical Records
    SERVICE EMPLOYEES INTERNATIONAL UNION (SEIU) HISTORICAL COLLECTION Records, 1905-1996 4.5 Linear Feet Accession Number 1924 The records of the SEIU Historical Collection, Part 1 were placed in the Archives of Labor and Urban Affairs in September 1997 and were opened for research in June 2006. Part 2 of the collection was accessioned in September 1997 and was opened for research in August 2006 The Service Employees International Union has been in continuous existence since 1921, although its roots extend back to 1902. Originally chartered by the AFL, it became a member of the AFL-CIO when those two organizations merged in 1955. In 2005, SEIU disaffiliated from the AFL-CIO to lead a coalition of other unions to form the Change to Win Federation. In its early years, SEIU primarily organized janitors and window washers. In addition to these, it eventually organized a range of other service workers, including doormen, elevator operators, nonacademic school employees, healthcare workers and public employees as well as service workers based in bowling alleys, stadiums and cemeteries, to mention just a few. Originally called the Building Service Employees International Union, the organization changed its name in 1968 to reflect a membership increasingly based in areas other than buildings. The SEIU Historical Collection comprises a variety of records documenting the union’s history. Some of these records include an original unedited draft of what would become the union’s official history entitled, A Need for Valor and the original essays that the union contracted John Jentz to write about the union’s early history.
    [Show full text]
  • Andy Stern's Plans for the Future of Big Labor
    The Ultimate Payoff: Andy Stern’s Plans for the Future of Big Labor By Ivan Osorio Summary: The December issue of Labor took a campaign to ‘rebrand’ the union. He Watch looked at the growing influence of used financial incentives to get all the local the 2.1-million member Service Employees branches of the union to begin using the SEIU International Union (SEIU) and its savvy name, its new logo and, of course, its new president, Andrew Stern. This article ex- color”— purple. amines Stern’s controversial attempts to restructure organized labor in the image of California Scheming SEIU, the conflicts this has provoked with Stern has encountered persistent resistance to other union leaders, and Stern’s newest or- his centralizing efforts. The most notorious ganizing initiatives. episode concerns one SEIU local in Califor- nia. A bitter and protracted struggle over the n 1973 Andrew Stern, a 23 year-old local’s fate has seriously embarrassed SEIU’s graduate of the University of Pennsyl- to the AFL-CIO leadership following Sen. national leadership, especially because it vania, became a social worker at the John Kerry’s presidential election defeat I in November 2004. Naturally, this would involved a forced merger with a local deeply Pennsylvania state welfare department. The enmeshed in corruption. department’s social-service workers had just require many union chiefs to relinquish their been unionized, and the bright and energetic fiefdoms, so Stern’s proposal encountered In August 2008, the Los Angeles Times Stern rose quickly in the ranks of SEIU Local considerable resistance within the AFL-CIO.
    [Show full text]
  • SEIU Derives the Majority of Its General
    - -- \\ Stefan Gleason, i Complainant, and MUR No. Service Employees International Union, P’4 P4 Respondent. PJ rJ h COMPLAINT Stefan Gleason is the Vice-president of the National Right to Work Legal Defense and Education Foundation, Inc. (“Foundation”). The Foundation provides free legal aid to employees who suffer an abuse of compulsory unionism.. An abuse, .. of compulsory unionism includes the mis-expenditure of the dues and fees of .; ‘1 employees who are required to join or financially support a labor union as a condition of employment.. 2.. Service Employees International Union (“SEIU”)is .a,labor organization as defined in 2 U.S.C.§.441b(b)(l). SEIU derives the majority of its general treasury funds from employees who work under collective bargaining , ;I I I agreements which compel them to join or financially support SEIU as a 1‘ I condition of employment. 1 3. The President ofSEIU, Andrew Stern, in a July 28, 2004, interview entitled “A Gleason Complaint,page 1. Union Chief’s Bold New Tack,” published in Business Week Online . : .. ‘ , (http ://uk .biz. yahoo. con1/040728/244/ezlli .html), admitted that SEIU ‘intended to become the “biggest contributor”.I , to America Coming Together (“ACT”). .. Stern is one of ACT’S founders. This article states that “65 million” dollars will be spent by SEIU on political matters, with some of it contributed to ACT. The article also admits that a source of these political contributions is3he ’ .. .. regular dues-paying members” of SEIU. This article is attached as Exhibit A. .. .. 4. On November 1 , 2004,‘ SEIU issued a press release entitled “Anatomy of an Election Strategy: The Facts on SEIU’s Role in Bringing Home a Victory for I America’s Working Families.” This press release is posted on the official SEIU web site at: h~://\Fllww.seiu.orrr/media/Dress.cfm?201 and is attached as Exhibit B.
    [Show full text]
  • NO SHORTCUTS Z Ii Iii
    i NO SHORTCUTS z ii iii NO SHORTCUTS z ORGANIZING FOR POWER IN THE NEW GILDED AGE . Jane F McAlevey 1 iv 1 Oxford University Press is a department of the University of Oxford. It furthers the University’s objective of excellence in research, scholarship, and education by publishing worldwide. Oxford is a registered trade mark of Oxford University Press in the UK and certain other countries. Published in the United States of America by Oxford University Press 198 Madison Avenue, New York, NY 10016, United States of America. © Oxford University Press 2016 All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior permission in writing of Oxford University Press, or as expressly permitted by law, by license, or under terms agreed with the appropriate reproduction rights organization. Inquiries concerning reproduction outside the scope of the above should be sent to the Rights Department, Oxford University Press, at the address above. You must not circulate this work in any other form and you must impose this same condition on any acquirer. CIP data is on file at the Library of Congress ISBN 978– 0– 19– 062471– 2 1 3 5 7 9 8 6 4 2 Printed by Sheridan Books, Inc., United States of America v vi vii Contents z Acknowledgments ix List of Figures xiii List of Tables xv 1. Introduction 1 2. The Power to Win is in the Community, Not the Boardroom 27 3. Nursing Home Unions: Class Snuggle vs.
    [Show full text]
  • Andy Stern - Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia Andy Stern from Wikipedia, the Free Encyclopedia
    6/7/13 Andy Stern - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Andy Stern From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Andrew L. "Andy" Stern (born November 22, 1950), is the former president[7][8] of the 2.2 million-member Service Andy Stern Employees International Union (SEIU), the fastest-growing union in the Americas. SEIU is the second largest union in the United States and Canada after the National Education Association.[9][10] Stern was elected in 1996 to succeed John Sweeney. He is currently a Senior Fellow at Columbia University.[11] Stern is intent upon influencing federal legislation that helps revitalize the labor movement through universal health care, expanding union ranks via the Employee Free Choice Act,[12] stronger regulations on business, profit sharing for employees, higher taxes, and efforts consistent with the improvement of the lives of Born Andrew L. Stern [citation needed] workers. November 22, 1950 West Orange, New Jersey For his talent at recruiting new members, Stern has been described as the "most important labor boss in America".[13] Nationality United States Stern is unapologetic about targeting private equity firms, Education B.A., 1971 shaming business leaders, and competing to build SEIU's Alma mater University of Pennsylvania membership: “We like to say: We use the power of persuasion first. If it doesn't work, we try the persuasion of Title International President, SEIU [14] power”. The share of workers belonging to a union in Term 1996–2010 2008 showed the largest annual growth rate since the first Predecessor Richard Cordtz report in 1983.[15] Growth in SEIU in 2008—88,926 members[16]--accounted for nearly 21 percent of the national Successor Mary Kay Henry union membership growth.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 Donna Leinwand
    NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LUNCHEON WITH RICHARD TRUMKA SUBJECT: DOMESTIC LEGISLATIVE INITIATIVES AND LABOR ISSUES MODERATOR: DONNA LEINWAND, PRESIDENT, NATIONAL PRESS CLUB LOCATION: NATIONAL PRESS CLUB BALLROOM, WASHINGTON, D.C. TIME: 12:30 P.M. EDT DATE: MONDAY, JANUARY 11, 2010 (C) COPYRIGHT 2008, NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, 529 14TH STREET, WASHINGTON, DC - 20045, USA. ALL RIGHTS RESERVED. ANY REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION IS EXPRESSLY PROHIBITED. UNAUTHORIZED REPRODUCTION, REDISTRIBUTION OR RETRANSMISSION CONSTITUTES A MISAPPROPRIATION UNDER APPLICABLE UNFAIR COMPETITION LAW, AND THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB. RESERVES THE RIGHT TO PURSUE ALL REMEDIES AVAILABLE TO IT IN RESPECT TO SUCH MISAPPROPRIATION. FOR INFORMATION ON BECOMING A MEMBER OF THE NATIONAL PRESS CLUB, PLEASE CALL 202-662-7505. DONNA LEINWAND: (Sounds gavel.) Good afternoon. Welcome to the National Press Club for our speakers luncheon. My name is Donna Leinwand. I'm President of the National Press Club and a reporter for USA Today. We’re the world’s leading professional organization for journalists, and we are committed to a future of journalism by providing informative programming and journalism education, and fostering a free press worldwide. For more information about the National Press Club, please visit our website at www.press.org. On behalf of our 3,500 members worldwide, I'd like to welcome our speaker and our guests in the audience today. I'd also like to welcome those of you who are watching us on C-SPAN. We're looking forward to today’s speech, and afterwards I’ll ask as many questions from the audience as time permits. Please hold your applause during the speech so that we have time for as many questions as possible.
    [Show full text]
  • Perpetual Struggle: Sources of Working-Class Identity and Activism in Collective Action
    PERPETUAL STRUGGLE: SOURCES OF WORKING-CLASS IDENTITY AND ACTIVISM IN COLLECTIVE ACTION by Rachel E. Meyer A dissertation submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy (Sociology) in The University of Michigan 2008 Doctoral Committee: Professor Howard A. Kimeldorf, Chair Professor Gregory B. Markus Professor Mark S. Mizruchi Emeritus Professor Mayer N. Zald Associate Professor Alford A. Young, Jr. copyright Rachel E. Meyer ______________________________________________________________________ 2008 To James, Noah and Gabriel ii Acknowledgements I am deeply grateful to the people whose testimony underlies this analysis, and I want to thank everyone who shared their stories with me. Although they will remain nameless in the interest of confidentiality, their honesty, openness, and insight were very much appreciated. In particular I would like to thank Madeline Talbott who for many years was lead organizer of Illinois ACRON. She was extremely helpful when I was doing research on the ground in Chicago, offering both a bird’s-eye view of the campaign along with detailed knowledge of the events and the people involved. She generously took time out of her busy schedule to make sure that this project got off the ground. Her support for this research, along with her insightful commentary on the living wage campaign, were crucial to its success. Inspiration for this project came out of my experiences with the members, officers and staff of the United Electrical, Radio, and Machine Workers of America (UE) where I learned first hand about the transformative power of collective action. I owe both inspirational and intellectual debts to my dear friends from the labor movement: Mark Dilley, Gail Francis, Polly Halfkenny, John Lambiase, Kim Lawson, and Mary McGinn.
    [Show full text]
  • No Shortcuts: the Case for Organizing
    City University of New York (CUNY) CUNY Academic Works All Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects Dissertations, Theses, and Capstone Projects 5-2015 No Shortcuts: The Case for Organizing Jane Frances McAlevey Graduate Center, City University of New York How does access to this work benefit ou?y Let us know! More information about this work at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu/gc_etds/1043 Discover additional works at: https://academicworks.cuny.edu This work is made publicly available by the City University of New York (CUNY). Contact: [email protected] i No Shortcuts: The Case for Organizing by Jane F. McAlevey A dissertation submitted to the Graduate Faculty in Sociology in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy, The City University of New York 2015 ii COPYRIGHT © 2015 JANE F. MCALEVEY All Rights Reserved iii APPROVAL PAGE, NO SHORTCUTS: THE CASE FOR ORGANIZING This manuscript has been read and accepted for the Graduate Faculty in Sociology to satisfy the dissertation requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy. Approved by: Date Chair of Examining Committee ______________________ _________________________________________ Frances Fox Piven, Professor Date Executive Officer, Sociology ______________________ __________________________________________ Philip Kasinitz, Professor Supervisory Committee Members James Jasper, Professor William Kornblum, Professor Dan Clawson, Professor, UMASS Amherst THE CITY UNIVERSITY OF NEW YORK iv ABSTRACT Abstract No Shortcuts: The Case for Organizing By Jane McAlevey Advisor: Frances Fox Piven This dissertation will explore how ordinary workers in the new economy create and sustain power from below. In workplace and community movements, individuals acting collectively have been shown to win victories using a variety of different approaches.
    [Show full text]
  • Voss Vita Jan 2020
    Kim Voss Department of Sociology Phone: 510-642-4766 476 Barrows Hall Email: [email protected] University of California, Berkeley http://sociology.berkeley.edu/faculty/kim-voss Berkeley, California 94720-1980 PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE Professor, Department of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley, 2004- Acting Dean, Division of Social Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, July 2019- Jan. 2020; July 2009; Jan.-June 2012. Associate Dean, Graduate Division, Jan. 2016- June 2018 Director, Berkeley Connect in Sociology Program, University of California, Berkeley, March 2013-June 2016 Chair, Department of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley, 2004-2007, August 2010- December 2011. Associate Dean, Division of Social Sciences, University of California, Berkeley, 2008- 2010. Associate Director, Institute of Industrial Relations (now Institute for Research on Labor and Employment), 1997-2004. Associate Professor, University of California, Berkeley, 1993-2003. Director of Graduate Studies, Sociology Department, University of California, Berkeley, 2000-2002, 2003-2004. Visiting Scholar, New School for Social Research, Center for Studies of Social Change, 1988. Assistant Professor, Department of Sociology, University of California, Berkeley, 1986- 1993. EDUCATION Ph.D. Sociology, Stanford University, 1986 M.S. Sociology of Development, Cornell University, 1977 B.A. Magna cum laude, Catawba College, Salisbury, N.C., 1974 PUBLICATIONS Books: Rallying for Immigrant Rights: The Fight for Inclusion in 21st Century America. Edited Volume with Irene Bloemraad, Berkeley: University of California Press, 2011. Hard Work: Remaking the American Labor Movement. With Rick Fantasia. Berkeley: University of California Press, 2004. Des Synidcats Domestiques: Repression Patronale et Resistance Syndicale Aux Etas- Unis. With Rick Fantasia. Paris: Editions Raisons D’Agir, 2003. Rebuilding Labor: Organizing and Organizers in the New Union Movement.
    [Show full text]
  • Socg222 · Social Movement Theory and Social Movement Research
    SOCG222 · SOCIAL MOVEMENT THEORY AND SOCIAL MOVEMENT RESEARCH Winter 2012 · Mondays · 2-5 PM · SSB 414 Professor Isaac Martin · [email protected] · SSB 469 Graduate office hours by appointment “Sociology is not a science; even if it were, there are particular reasons why the study of revolution would not admit of scientific treatment.... It seems that the best way to prove that something does not admit of a particular treatment is honestly and forthrightly to make the attempt, and to persevere until it no longer works.” -- Gustav Landauer, Revolution (1907) Why and how do social movements emerge? When and how should we expect them to transform society? These questions have been central preoccupations of sociology since the beginning. Indeed, answering questions like these was arguably the very raison d'etre of sociology. Lorenz von Stein, who coined the term “social movement” in 1850, used it to refer both to the struggle of French workers for social equality, and to the dawning awareness that “society” was a thing distinct from the state. Although sociologists have been asking questions about social movements for more than a century, we have not yet pinned down the answers. Perhaps a social movement is, as Gustav Landauer said of revolution, a particularly elusive phenomenon. Consider one common definition: a social movement is a sustained, collective, and extra-institutional challenge to authority. How are we to study something that meets this definition? Because a movement is sustained and collective, any individual fieldworker will usually find it difficult to observe more than a small part of the action directly.
    [Show full text]
  • Am2021-Program.Pdf
    ASA is pleased to acknowledge the supporting partners of the 116th Virtual Annual Meeting 116th Virtual Annual Meeting Emancipatory Sociology: Rising to the Du Boisian Challenge 2021 Program Committee Aldon D. Morris, President, Northwestern University Rhacel Salazar Parreñas, Vice President, University of Southern California Nancy López, Secretary-Treasurer, University of New Mexico Joyce M. Bell, University of Chicago Hae Yeon Choo, University of Toronto Nicole Gonzalez Van Cleve, Brown University Jeff Goodwin, New York University Tod G. Hamilton, Princeton University Mignon R. Moore, Barnard College Pamela E. Oliver, University of Wisconsin-Madison Brittany C. Slatton, Texas Southern University Earl Wright, Rhodes College Land Acknowledgement and Recognition Before we can talk about sociology, power, inequality, we, the American Sociological Association (ASA), acknowledge that academic institutions, indeed the nation-state itself, was founded upon and continues to enact exclusions and erasures of Indigenous Peoples. This acknowledgement demonstrates a commitment to beginning the process of working to dismantle ongoing legacies of settler colonialism, and to recognize the hundreds of Indigenous Nations who continue to resist, live, and uphold their sacred relations across their lands. We also pay our respect to Indigenous elders past, present, and future and to those who have stewarded this land throughout the generations TABLE OF CONTENTS d Welcome from the ASA President..............................................................................................................................................................................1
    [Show full text]